scene-set_transform

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Set', implying mutation, but does not explain whether all transforms must be provided together, whether partial updates are allowed, or what units are used (though schema titles hint at radians and world location). It also fails to mention error conditions or side effects beyond the mutation itself.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded and easy to scan, earning full marks for conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, more context is needed. The description does not clarify whether the operation is idempotent, whether all three transform properties are required or optional, or how partial calls behave. It also fails to differentiate from similar sibling tools, leaving the agent with incomplete information.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema includes descriptive titles for each property (e.g., 'World location [x, y, z]', 'Euler rotation in radians [x, y, z]') that already convey the meaning effectively. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond repeating the property names. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action and resource: 'Set an object's location/rotation/scale'. It uses a specific verb and resource, making the purpose obvious. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'object-transform_set', which likely performs a similar transformative operation, so it loses a point for lack of differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like object-transform_set. The description does not mention any preconditions, common use cases, or exclusions. Users must infer from the name and schema alone, which is insufficient.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.